Alliances and Fractures

Abstract

The anti-war movement in Britain is generally described in singular terms, thereby implying there is a unified body. It is more accurate to refer to the collectivity as the anti-war and peace movements because this encompasses the range of activists, from those wanting to see one side defeated to those who abhor all forms of violence. For the sake of brevity we refer to the anti-war movement, but stress that it is an uneasy alliance of remarkably diverse groups and individuals. The anti-war movement is fractured and fragmented, yet simultaneously it contains multiple alliances and coalitions. The common cause is ‘Stop the War’, but the more detailed aims, justifications, methods and alternatives of participants are as heterogeneous as the groups involved. In addition, previous anti-war campaigns invested heavily in lobbying established political parties. For instance, CND has, over its history, lobbied intensely within the Labour party who, as a result, have for brief periods been committed to a policy of unilateral disarmament. The decline of class politics, plus the transformations of New Labour and its own heavy involvement in recent wars, means that the present anti-war movement is not only more diverse than its predecessors, but also less inclined to follow a parliamentary focus. It joined together to oppose the ‘War on Terror’ and pursuit of this goal operates outside and across party politics.